Posted!

Join the Conversation

Comments

Welcome to our new and improved comments, which are for subscribers only.
This is a test to see whether we can improve the experience for you.
You do not need a Facebook profile to participate.

You will need to register before adding a comment.
Typed comments will be lost if you are not logged in.

Please be polite.
It's OK to disagree with someone's ideas, but personal attacks, insults, threats, hate speech, advocating violence and other violations can result in a ban.
If you see comments in violation of our community guidelines, please report them.

By the quirks of how Memphis is authorized to impose zoning laws — through private acts instead of the state code most other cities use — the city is not empowered to remove off-premise billboards that don't conform to the 2009 sign code, even after sign owners have made enough money on them to cover their capital costs.

But the city can limit billboards' impact by "freezing'' such signs in place, not allowing owners to upgrade them. It's a more gradual way of removing nonconforming signs that over time would deteriorate or become so obsolete that they would eventually fade away.

Not so fast, state a couple of billboard owners who are seeking variances so they can upgrade signs that are legal but nonconforming.

St. Charles Place Inc. wants to convert its off-premises, or stand-alone, billboard at 8473 U.S. 64 in the Wolfchase area to a digital sign.

And Burelz Investments GP seeks not only to convert its "tri-vision'' billboard — in which the slats rotate to show three different messages at 4816 Poplar, near Colonial — to digital, the owner wants to make its nonconforming but legal sign taller by 15 feet.

The Unified Development Code states that such signs cannot be expanded or altered "to prolong its useful life.'' Converting to a different technology is also prohibited.

But the two owners — both represented by Brenda Solomito Basar of Solomito Land Planning — make nearly identical cases for an exception.

As if to refute the validity of the city's strategy for "freezing'' the signs' condition until the billboards eventually go away, each owner states in the applications, "The sign will remain in place as is for decades.''

Since the signs aren't going away, the applications indicate, granting variances would benefit residents because: The back-lit illumination of digital boards creates less spill-over light pollution; the digital boards would be capable of displaying emergency and law enforcement messages as a public service; and billboard employees would no longer have to climb to the sign face on an exposed catwalk.

The Board of Adjustment is to review the applications at 2 p.m. Sept. 27 at City Hall.

Memphis and Shelby County Planning Director Josh Whitehead, who explained the legal background for what the city can and cannot do in regulating billboards, offered his take on the best way to reduce the number of billboards.

"Cite those that have lost their nonconforming status and protection,'' he wrote in an email.

"Under the current sign code, any billboard that is unused for a period of six months loses its protected status and must be torn down,'' he said. "The Office of Construction Code Enforcement is currently documenting those unused signs to cite them to Environmental Court once six months has passed.''